Tim Cook's Impact on Apple Detailed in New Profile Along With Plans for New Board Members

The Wall Street Journal has released a new profile of Apple under Tim Cook, highlighting the changes the CEO has made to the company following the long and famous reign of Steve Jobs. While most of this information was previously known, it is a solid overview of the changes Cook has introduced to Apple and it does give a few new details on Cook's plans.

Described as a "kinder, gentler" workplace, Apple under Tim Cook has a new focus on deep collaboration between employees. Cook is said to be less involved in product development and more willing to delegate tasks to employees, expanding the roles of several executives and giving design chief Jonathan Ive more control over product development. He's also made major moves like acquiring Beats and hiring high-profile executives like Angela Ahrendts, and he's also said to be working on adding new board members.

Quote:

According to people familiar with the company, Mr. Cook is actively seeking new directors to add to Apple's eight-person board, known for its loyalty to Mr. Jobs. Six of the seven outside directors are aged 63 or older. Four of them have served for more than a decade, including two who have been on the board since the late 1990s: former Intuit Corp. Chief Executive Bill Campbell and J. Crew Group Inc. Chief Executive Millard S. "Mickey" Drexler.

Cook is labeled as more of a manager and less of a visionary, causing current and former Apple employees to worry that without Steve Jobs, Apple is losing its "frenetic pace and focus" on new products. Employees also worry that the company may be working on too many projects at once.

Quote:

Under Mr. Cook, current and former employees say Apple may be spreading itself too thin, pursuing too many ideas and compromising the "laser focus" that Mr. Jobs used to create the iMac, iPhone and iPad.

"It was Steve's job to say no," one of these people said. "Tim is not as comfortable doing that."

The Wall Street Journal's full report has a much more detailed comparison of Cook and Jobs and it offers insight on other changes Cook has brought to the company, including lessening its impact on the environment and pledging to match employee charity donations.

He is not comfortable saying no? Tim, you are the CEO now. It is up to you to settle stalemates and give products that are ultimately a reflection of your company the final sniff test. You are the decider and you are no longer the COO.

“People think focus means saying yes to the thing you’ve got to focus on. But that’s not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I’m actually as proud of the things we haven’t done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying ‘no’ to 1,000 things.”

He is not comfortable saying no? Tim, you are the CEO now. It is up to you to settle stalemates and give products that are ultimately a reflection of your company the final sniff test. You are the decider and you are no longer the COO.

Man up already.

One person said he doesn't feel comfortable saying no. Other than that, there is no proof.

Wasn't there an article on Macrumors some time ago about Cook's style - how he often used to repeatedly ask the same question until he got the answer he wanted (or until everyone went silent and was staring at the table).

The WS sharks want Cook out. They want a more pliable CEO that is more "WS friendly" (think cash hoard sucked away via dividends). Usually they attack more directly. In this case, they just insinuate (using convenient unnamed sources) that he is not the right man for the job (while giving him his due on issues that are considered chump change). SJ handpicked Cook for the job. I would rather go with that than some WS brown-noser.

Poor Tim Cook. The guy has kept Apple rolling along and just as successful as before Steve Jobs' death, and yet everyone seems incredibly eager to invalidate his presence there. People seem to forget that he was one of the integral players in Apple's revival. It's not like he was just hired the day Steve Jobs left the company.

The man has his own style of leadership and it seems to have worked out just fine for the last few years (god forbid he's not a clone of Steve!) And that's not to mention his work at Apple for the decade plus prior to that. I'm not sure why people think he has to keep proving himself.

Is this really the best the WSJ could do? And the Tim vs Steve comparisons...yawn. What amazes me is people saying Apple is spreading itself too thin. What they don't get is Apple isn't this small underdog anymore. It's the most valuable company in the world; #6 on the Fortune 500 based on revenues. When iPhone 4 launched Apple announced 1.7 million sales over launch weekend. Only 3 years Apple announced 9 million sales over launch weekend. The company is vastly bigger than it was when Steve was running the show.

Also, since Tim's expertise is different than Steve's it only makes sense that he would empower his executive team more. And in order to do that they have to be able to get along and work well together. I firmly believe some of the things we saw at WWDC this year are a direct result of the org changes Tim put in place back in 2012. I don't think it's a coincidence we're getting stuff like 3rd party keyboards, widgets and inter-app communications after Steve's passing and certain executives were let go.

IMO Tim is taking Apple in the right direction (though Beats is still a head scratcher for me) and is the right leader for the company now. The best proof of that is the fact that no executive team members have left (other than Forstall and Browett, both of whom were fired). I'm glad to see there may be some board changes. I'd love to see Bill Campbell and Al Gore go.

__________________"Terrorism is horrible and must be stopped. All of us must do everything we can do to stop this craziness. These people shouldn't exist. They should be eliminated."— Tim Cook 

A senior board known for it's loyalty to Jobs? That just sounds terrible. I understand that Wozniak deserves a chair in the company. But a board of eight men talking about the good ol days and what Steve would do? I just don't like the idea for Apple to be a senior club.

He is not comfortable saying no? Tim, you are the CEO now. It is up to you to settle stalemates and give products that are ultimately a reflection of your company the final sniff test. You are the decider and you are no longer the COO.

So.... Apple employees supposedly 'worry that without Steve Jobs, Apple is losing its "frenetic pace and focus" on new products'?

I can only assume none of these supposed Apple employees have heard of a thing called "WWDC," and didn't pay attention to it this year! WWDC showed Apple doing tons of great things, in parallel, really well, and FAST. And if "product" means hardware to you (even though software is by far the biggest reason to choose any Apple device), those signs were at WWDC as well.

How many conflicting "profiles" on Tim Cook can we possibly have in a few months? Basically, "people familiar with the matter" is code for hearsay.

After WWDC, we get reports that Apple employees are happy and telling people like Gruber "its starting to get fun again, like when we made the iPhone." And Jony Ive saying internally the mood is very similar to what it was like before the iPhone.

But then we have the trustworthy WSJ and their "people familiar with the matter" saying that employees are NOT actually enthused, and instead pessimistic.

Right....

Please people, stop buying into these "rumors" so much. They're not fact. They're 9/10 times simply opinions or guesses.